Allowed

Jay Kumar Sharma Son of Sanwarmal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Jan 2024CRLR/68/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Criminal Revision Bench allowed revision petition condoning 65 days delay. Quashed order dismissing vehicle release application. Released vehicle to registered owner on bond and conditions to prevent misuse during trial.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for release of Activa on furnishing bond of 1 lakh with two sureties of 50k each and undertaking to produce vehicle.

Jay Kumar Sharma Son of Sanwarmal Sharma Vs State of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 68/2024

¶3

Jay Kumar Sharma Son Of Sanwarmal Sharma, Resident Of 83, Laxmi Nagar, Goner Road, Jaipur

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Pathka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶10

Order

¶11

12/01/2024

¶12

Considering the reasons mentioned in the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, the application is allowed and delay of 65 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

¶13

This criminal revision petition has been filed against the order dt. 4.8.2023 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan-I whereby application filed by the petitioner u/s 451 readwith Section 457 Cr.P.C. for releasing the vehicle Activa bearing registration No.RJ-14-KN-3261 was dismissed.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle and recovery of contraband article was effected from accused Gopi Sharma. He further submits that Gopi is close relative and there is no rival claim regarding alleged vehicle and trial of the case will take considerable time. Petitioner is ready to furnish Superdaginama before the court. In the light of Sunderbai Ambala Desai vs. State

¶15

[CRLR-68/2024]

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

of Gujarat (2002) 10 SCC 290, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that vehicle be given to the petitioner on furnishing 'Supurdginama'.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the revision petition and contends that vehicle in question was used for commission of offence u/s 8/21 of NDPS Act. Thus, looking to the stringent provisions enshrined u/s 60(3) of the NDPS Act, the revision petition may be dismissed.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

¶20

Undisputedly, the petitioner is registered owner of the said vehicle. It is also undisputed fact that recovery of contraband article was effected from accused Gopi Sharma.

¶21

Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed and the order dated 4.8.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside and the vehicle Activa bearing No.RJ-14-KN-3261 in question is ordered to be released on ‘supardgi’ till the completion of the trial upon following conditions:-

¶22

(a) the petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court and give undertaking to produce the vehicle Activa bearing No.RJ-14-KN-3261 in the Court as and when required to do so.

¶23

(b) the petitioner shall get the vehicle Activa photographed showing the registration number as well as the chassis number. Such photograph shall be taken in the presence of the Investigating Officer, to be kept on the file of the case.

¶24

[CRLR-68/2024]

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

(c) the personal bond of the petitioner and bonds of sureties shall carry the photographs of the petitioner and his sureties and the bonds of sureties shall further carry the photographs of persons identifying them before the Court which is with full residential particulars of the sureties and the persons identifying them.

¶27

(d) the petitioner shall undertake further not to transfer the ownership of the vehicle Activa and not to lease it to anyone and not to make or allow any changes in it to be made so as to make unidentifiable.

¶28

(e) the petitioner shall not allow the vehicle Activa bearing No.RJ-14-KN-3261, to be used for any antisocial activities.

¶29

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶30

Brijesh 33.

Jay Kumar Sharma Son of Sanwarmal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Kumar Sharma Son of Sanwarmal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Nayak S/O Shri Madan Nayak Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganesh Nayak S/O Shri Madan Nayak Vs State of Rajasthan

Sulkhan Singh Son of Shri Shersingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Juvenile X S/O Late Shri Raju Vs State of Rajasthan

Khilauni S/O Kishan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Sharma S/O Late Sh. Kalyan Sahay Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan